Brownback to Move on Presidential Bid (Will Announce Jan 20)

WASHINGTON - Sen. Sam Brownback, a Kansas Republican and favorite son of the religious right, will officially enter the presidential race later this month in his home state.

"He will be fully announcing on January 20 in Topeka, Kansas," Brian Hart, the senator's spokesman, said Friday. The move was expected even though Brownback set up an exploratory committee in December to gauge whether he had enough support for a full-blown campaign.

After the announcement in Kansas, Hart said Brownback will fly to Washington to participate in the anti-abortion march marking the anniversary of the Supreme Court ruling.

Brownback is a lesser-known candidate in a crowded GOP presidential field that likely will include Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Rudy Giuliani, the former New York City mayor. Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, rounds out the top tier. All three are considering runs but, to various extents, also have records or positions on social or fiscal issues that don't sit well with the Republican base.

So, Brownback - a Catholic revered by the GOP's conservative wing for his opposition to abortion and gay marriage - sees an opening in the race for someone like him.

At the time, Brownback also called for a return to an American culture that promotes family values. He said the main focus of his campaign would be "to save and improve lives, rebuild families and renew the culture" in the United States that supports the institution of family.

Brownback, 50, was raised on a farm near tiny Parker, Kan. - population 281 today - where his parents still live.

His first foray into national politics was in 1976 while a student at Kansas State University, where he campaigned for Ronald Reagan in his unsuccessful quest to wrest the GOP nomination from Gerald Ford.

After receiving his law degree from the University of Kansas in 1982, he practiced law in Manhattan, Kan., and served as secretary of the state board of agriculture. He was named a White House fellow in 1990, and worked in the office of the U.S. trade representative.

Brownback was elected to the House in 1994, part of the Republican revolution that gave the GOP control of both the House and Senate for the first time in 40 years.

Two years later, Brownback was elected to the Senate, winning the seat Bob Dole vacated to run for the presidency. Brownback, who promised to serve no more than two terms, has said he will not seek re-election in 2010.

Having read that you said that the American Conservative Union (ACU) recorded a perfect voting score of 100% for Senator Sam Brownback, I went to the ACU website to check this information, and it is true that for the year 2005, Sam Brownback is among the 10 “Best and Brightest” Standout Senators, according to the ACU (see http://www.conservative.org/archive2/senate.asp). This should make clear that Sam Brownback is from the “Conservative Persuasion”.

However, because of Sam Brownback’s position about immigration, I am not sure that Sam Brownback’s score in 2006 got a 100% favorable rate by the ACU, because, on March 28, the ACU said: “The immigration bill produced yesterday by the Senate Judiciary Committee can in no way be viewed as positive reform. On the contrary, the bill essentially provides for a sweeping amnesty program for the 11 million-plus illegal aliens already in the United States.” […] “The ACU applauded Senators Orrin Hatch (R-UT), Charles Grassley (R-IA), Jon Kyl (R-AZ), Jeff Sessions (R-AL) John Cornyn (R-TX) and Tom Coburn (R-Oklahoma), all of whom refused to allow misplaced compassion to excuse criminality.” (see: http://www.conservative.org/pressroom/2006/060328pr.asp). Please note carefully that the ACU did not say that these senators have no compassion at all, but that they do not have “misplaced compassion”.

Because Senator Sam Brownback is a Compassionate Conservative, a number of people may believe that Sam Brownback seems to have this type of “misplaced compassion” towards immigrants. However, one may wonder whether this is a true perception of Sam Brownback’s position or rather a misperception of his real position. It seems to me that if Sam Brownback wants to get the vote of the Conservatives, he needs to make an effort to make more clearly known that he is in favor of strengthening the borders (construction of a good fence in the Southwest, enforcement of the immigration laws, etc.). And he should supply a satisfactory explanation about his position concerning the millions of illegal aliens who are presently in the United States. Sam Brownback did vote for the fence, but many people may not be very sure how strong he is on this point. On the other hand, his “compassionate side” and his desire to work with other senators to find a comprehensive solution about the millions of immigrants, have led many to believe that Sam Brownback is definitely in favor of an “open borders / amnesty” policy. As long as this is what many people understand about his position, Sam Brownback will have great difficulties to win the presidential primaries and the general elections. The Democrats are usually more consistent with their liberal agenda than Sam Brownback may appear to be concerning immigration. Sam Brownback needs not only to show that he wants to treat with dignity everyone (including immigrants – legal or illegal), and to find a constructive solution concerning the millions of illegal immigrants, but also he needs to dispel the impression that his compassionate attitude may lead him to reward the criminal behavior of illegal immigrants by granting them a “free-pass” (i.e. an easy participation in a Guest-Worker Program that will help them to become American Citizens).

There is no doubt that it is not easy to find a good balanced view on such a subject: too much “compassion” and Sam Brownback may look a “softy” or a compromiser on immigration. Too much “justice” (strongly enforcing the laws against illegal immigration), and Sam Brownback may look a “heartless/narrow-minded far-right conservative”, desiring to promote the sending of “Gestapo forces” to crack down on illegal immigration. Compassion and Justice together must “balance” the equation. Addressing adequately this situation is easy neither for Sam Brownback nor for anybody else, if a good and fair solution is to be found. We must also realize that Sam Brownback cannot please everybody (whatever he may say or do about this matter). When we consider the other choices that we may have for the presidential elections of 2008, I believe that Sam Brownback remains an option worthy of consideration for Conservatives.

I have a hierarchy of current issues.

1. Life it the single most important issue. Period. All else is insignificant if you, your children, or your elders can be killed.

2. The War on Terror, and the campaign in Iraq are extremely significant. If we do not resolve this, then we are telling families of our deceased and injured heros that their loved ones' sacrifices were never important in the first place. In other words we're tellling them that their loved one's life was wasted.

Also, we tell terrorists and the world that we are totally unreliable and defeatable by simple perseverence.

3. Homeland Security Issues: Coast and Border control is critical to a secure America and is an extended part of the War on Terror. Illegal immigration would fall into this category.

4. Strict Constructionist Judiciary.

I will vote for a pro-lifer who is wrong on homeland security before I will vote for an anti-lifer who is right on homeland security.

I fully agree with your priorities (1. pro-life, 2. war on terror, 3. homeland security, 4. Strict Constructionist Judiciary). And I think that Sam Brownback is very strong on all these current issues. There is no doubt about this.

The only issue that is somewhat difficult to deal with is the question of immigration. Here we need to make a distinction between three types of immigrants:
- 1. Legal Immigrants (people from other countries who come to the United States with an official Visa).
- 2. Illegal Immigrants (people who come to the USA without proper documentation, or who stay in the US once their Visa is expired).
- 3. Terrorist/Criminal Immigrants (people who come legally or illegally to harm us and/or to implement criminal activities).

I think that everyone should agree to treat with dignity and compassion the Legal Immigrants (First Category) and to strongly oppose the Terrorist/Criminal Immigrants (Third Category). There is no doubt that Sam Brownback is 100% in agreement with this: we must kindly welcome the Legal Immigrants (those who have gone through the official process), and fiercely fight against the Terrorist/Criminal Immigrants (those who have evil intentions).

The difficulty comes when we are considering poor people who could not find a job in their own country (Mexico, Nigeria, etc.) and who came illegally to the United States to make a living so that they can support their families. What should we do with this type of people? Deport all of them? … or offer them Amnesty and Green Cards? Here, Sam Brownback tries to be Compassionate and Conservative. Finding a good balance between these two perspectives is easy for nobody. This is why Sam Brownback is in favor of more controls at the borders, but he wants to find constructive and fair solutions for this type of immigrants.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.